Pack dilemma

[TaperPin]

It’s certainly a functional difference. Load lift vs. no load lift is functionally different.

Are you saying it’s not possible to lash the game bag as high with a shorter frame? If these upper straps attached to the frame no higher than the shoulders it wouldn’t make much of a difference. It makes more of a difference how much the load shelf down low is allowed to sag - cinch it forcing the load to ride up more if you have to.

I don’t have a k4, but any pack can have the load shelf lashed up as high as the person wants.

 

[Alaska92]

Are you saying it’s not possible to lash the game bag as high with a shorter frame? If these upper straps attached to the frame no higher than the shoulders it wouldn’t make much of a difference. It makes more of a difference how much the load shelf down low is allowed to sag - cinch it forcing the load to ride up more if you have to.

I don’t have a k4, but any pack can have the load shelf lashed up as high as the person wants.

View attachment 773785

No. We are talking about different things. I’m talking about correct load lift angle. The height of the frame properly coordinated with your torso length will determine the correct load lifter angle. I consistently see too short of frames and ill fitted packs in pictures on the internet as well as people around me. Correct load lift angle is a functional necessity for optimal comfort under heavy load. That angle is about 35 to 45 degrees. I prefer 45 degrees under heavy load. For my torso length that requires a 26” frame. A 26” frame with a light load and in heavy cover can be a bit bothersome at times.

 

[TaperPin]

No. We are talking about different things. I’m talking about correct load lift angle. The height of the frame properly coordinated with your torso length will determine the correct load lifter angle. I consistently see too short of frames and ill fitted packs in pictures on the internet as well as people around me. Correct load lift angle is a functional necessity for optimal comfort under heavy load. That angle is about 35 to 45 degrees. I prefer 45 degrees under heavy load. For my torso length that requires a 26” frame. A 26” frame with a light load and in heavy cover can be a bit bothersome at times.

Oh, gotcha - I was off in left field.

Shorter packs do change that angle, which brings the pressure point up on the shoulder, but the effect of the different angle must be different for different people. With packs having from 30 degrees to zero I honestly have never thought one was better than the other, carrying the same weight.

Obviously the frame has to fit the torso, but I’ll take a shorter frame that extends barely above the shoulders every time.

 

[mtnbound]

Can you give me an idea of how much easier you found it to move through brush with the shorter frame? Like is it, “holy s*** what a difference!” or more “it is slightly less annoying with a shorter frame”?

I’d be willing to pay new pack money for the first reaction. If it’s ultimately a negligible difference I’d probably keep what I have and use the money saved for other things.

Mtnbound, I realize that’s a personal choice and distinction, just trying to get some perspective since you mentioned using both frame heights.

For me, it was significant. I like to wear my hip belt right at my belly button, so the 25" frame sits too high. I realize the load lifter angle is not optimum, but I cannot tell any difference in load carrying between the two with a 90-lb pack except for the smaller frame's lack of getting hung up on the brush. I also use my pack for other activities, and I can wear a helmet and look up with the smaller frame.